Sony a7R Mark III review

Introduction

The Sony a7R Mark III is the company's latest high-resolution full frame mirrorless camera. Much like Nikon's recent D850, it's one that combines this resolution with high speed and fast autofocus capabilities to a degree we've not previously seen.

Like its predecessor, the Mark III is built around a 42MP BSI CMOS sensor, but unlike the a7R II, it can shoot at ten frames per second.

Essentially it can be seen as an a7R II that inherits many of the lessons learned from the company's pro-sports model, the a9. This means faster processing, improved autofocus, improved handling and ergonomics, as well as the adoption of a much larger battery. While some of the individual changes are subtle, they very quickly combine to produce a hugely capable and highly useable camera.

Key Features

42MP BSI CMOS sensor

Faster, lower-noise image processing

10 fps shooting with full AF, 8 fps with 'live' updates between shots

3.69M dot (1280 x 960 pixel) OLED viewfinder

Improved autofocus, including more tenacious Eye AF mode

5-axis image stabilization, rated at 5.5 stops (CIPA) with 50mm lens

4K footage from 'Super 35' crop region oversampled from 5K capture

Video AF less inclined to refocus to background

'Picture Profile' video gamma/gamut modes including S-Log2 and 3

Twin SD Card slots (one UHS-I and one UHS-II compatible)

Bayer-cancelling multi-shot mode for improved resolution

True 14 bit uncompressed Raw, even in continuous drive mode

Use of phase detection (including Eye AF) at 3 fps with adapted lenses

Sony says the a7R III is based around the same 42MP back side illuminated CMOS sensor as its immediate predecessor, so doesn't gain the full speed advantages of the a9's Stacked CMOS chip (in terms of AF performance, continuous shooting rate or reduced rolling shutter in video and electronic shutter mode). However, the adoption of the processing systems, algorithms and refinements introduced on the a9 all have their benefits.

This means a camera with a touchscreen and dedicated joystick for AF point positioning, a camera with a deeper grip and improved customization, with better laid-out menus and much improved battery life.

Video capabilities

Sony also says the improved processing will benefit video shooting. The oversampled footage taken from a Super 35 (~APS-C) region of the sensor is still expected to look better than the subsampled capture from the full sensor width but both are supposedly improved by the new processing chain. We'll delve into this later in the review.

To take advantage of the camera's dynamic range, the Picture Profile system of color and tonal response borrowed from Sony's professional video line now includes the even flatter S-Log3 gamma curve. That said, there is no 10-bit capture possible; the camera can still only capture 8-bit 4:2:0 footage internally or output 8-bit 4:2:2, which may limit the usefulness of S-Log3 if it makes posterization more likely when the footage is graded.

For users wanting to use the camera's video dynamic range with a high dynamic range display but without the extra hassle of color grading, the a7R III joins the Panasonic GH5 in offering Hybrid Log Gamma recording: essentially Log capture with tags to tell displays how to correctly render it.

Compared:

The a7R III's most obvious peer is the D850, since it's the other high-speed, high resolution full frame camera. We'll also note the changes relative to its predecessor and its other, less rapid high-res rivals.

Sonya7R III

Nikon D850

Sonya7R II

Canon EOS 5DS R

Pentax K-1

MSRP(Body only)

$3200

$3300

$3200

$3900

$1800

Pixel Count (MP)

42.4

45.7

42.4

50

36

Sensor type

BSI-CMOS

BSI-CMOS

BSI-CMOS

CMOS

CMOS

ISO Range

100-32,000

64-25,600

100-25,600

100-6,400

100-204,800

Stabilization

In-body (5.5 stops)

Lens-only

In-body(4.5 stops)

Lens-only

In-body(5 stops)

AF working range

–3EV (@F2)

–4EV

–2EV (@F2)

–2EV

–3EV

Viewfinder magnification & eyepoint

0.78x23mm

0.75x17mm

0.78x23mm

0.71x21mm

0.70x21.7mm

Connectivity options

Wi-Fi, BT(+NFC)

Wi-Fi, BT

Wi-Fi(+NFC)

Optional SD Card

Wi-Fi

Video

4K/30p1080/120p

4K/30p

4K/30p

1080/60p

1080/30p

Mic/Headphone

Yes / Yes

Yes / Yes

Yes / Yes

Yes / No

Yes / Yes

Flash sync speed

1/250th

1/250th

1/250th

1/200th

1/200th

Flash Sync socket

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Continuous shooting

10fps

7fps*

5fps

5.0fps

4.4fps

Intervalometer

No

Yes

Via app

Yes

Yes

Memory format

SD (UHS-II)SD (UHS-I)

XQDSD (UHS-II)

1x SD (UHS-I)

CF (UDMA)SD (UHS-I)

2x SD(UHS-I)

USB (Connector)

3.1 (C)2.0 (micro B)

3.0 (micro B)

2.0 (micro B)

3.0 (micro B)

2.0 (micro B)

Battery life (CIPA)VF/LCD

530/650

1,840/ -

290/340

700/200

760/ -

Weight

657g (23.2oz)

1005g (35.5oz)

625g (22.0oz)

930g (32.8oz)

1010g(35.6oz)

*D850 can shoot 9fps when combined with a battery grip and D5-style battery.

As should be apparent, the Sony offers a combination of resolution, speed and video capabilities not easily matched by its peers. And, with the new battery, is able to offer much more similar endurance, if you're not in a situation in which you can plug the camera in to an external power source.

I agree with Richard's initial assessment - if I'm using the D850 with 3D Tracking enabled, where I place an AF point over a subject and initiate tracking and let the camera do the work for me, it generally fares better than the a7R III's Lock On AF in my opinion and experience (though neither is really a match for either the Sony a9 nor the Nikon D5).

On the other hand, to Richard's point, Nikon really has nothing on Sony's Eye AF. If viewed as its own form of subject tracking, Eye AF hugely impressive. But for most people, not every subject they'll want to track will be an eye.

@Carey Rose I understand that the Nikon 3D tracking is impressive, however for critical shots sport photographers would not relay on it just because not the most reliable still, cannot risk a random switch of subject. How the two cameras compare in tracking when a relatively small area is selected? That is generally more relevant for sport photographers.

@CCD FTWyou are subject tracking when you are in continuos focus, and if you have 425 AF points at your disposal the camera is switching around the active AF points even if you have a small are selected, believe me :-)

Thanks for the explanation. Guess Sony still got some works to do about their lock-on AF

One interesting thing is that seems like A7RIII is showing this big green box again in lock-af mode in the demonstration video, while for A6300/A9 there are only little green squares. AFAIK the big green box uses color to recognize the subject and the little ones use distance information. Usually the little ones are more reliable. Is Sony going back to the big green box on this camera?

@ Armandio - "you are subject tracking when you are in continuos focus, and if you have 425 AF points at your disposal the camera is switching around the active AF points even if you have a small are selected, believe me :-)"

I'm not sure what you're saying makes sense? What you seem to be referring to is using wide area focus, which will pick the subject for you (and is largely based on distance). This is not tracking a subject, this is performing C-AF across a wide area of the frame. Subject tracking identifies and follows a subject as it moves around the frame and maintains focus on that subject, regardless of whatever else is in the frame.

Using. Different focus areas from wide down to the smallest point is not subject tracking (or could be considered manual subject tracking), but the camera will shift focus to whatever is in the AF area at that time.

@CCD FTWA D850 has about 150 AF points, a 5DIV has about 60, the A7RIII about 400. So if you get a subset of the 400 to about, 60 is doing about the same thing as the 5DIV on a smaller area.At the end of the day we are picking on semantics, time to move on? I am just interested in knowing how the AF of the A7RIII compares with the D850 when a smaller area is selected, that is how sport photographers shoot and they are the ones with most demanding AF performance.

@ Armandino - It is semamtics, it's a completely different context. You are describing continuous autofocus. Not subject tracking. People seem to get these confused on quite the regular basis (in fact it seems to me most people don't know there is a difference and use the terms interchangeably).

Considering DPR focus their attention so much on subject tracking it is worth making clear that difference. When DPR say the subject tracking isn't that reliable, that is NOT the same as saying that the continuous autofocus sucks.

I was still convinced that dpreview works independently. Til today. How is it possible, that a7rII and a7rIII both get the same score? Same sensor, plus salvation in all areas, af, speed, battery, .... I just do not believe it. I do not believe you anymore either. Is it about sony not allowed being better than nikon?

The world moves on, cameras have to keep up with their peers just to get the same score. (Our scoring system doesn't have a category for battery life, so that's not factored in, by the way).

There is no consideration of brand when it comes to scoring. The a7R III scored fractionally more than the D850, I think. If you use the score comparison tool, you'll see that the areas in which one camera beats the other are consistent with the performance detailed in their respective reviews.

My disappointments of this camera:1. No internal 10-bit 4:2:2 4K video recording2. Pixel shift shooting is slower compared to Pentax K-13. No lossless RAW because buffer could take more photos and memory card bandwidth is not wasted.

Bonus complaint: No full sensor readout and oversampling 42MP -> ~ 8MP for video. This probably would be too much to ask in this price range.

The longer it needs to take the pictures the greater the chance you get some moire effects from slowly mothing subjects in the frame. If you looked very carefully at the picture DPR had on the topic you could see a moire pattern in the clouds behind the skyscraper due to cloud movement.

@yxaHe asked how it 'compared', so he needs to read the D850 review as well.

Let me help:"we were surprised to find some issues with the D850's 3D Tracking when the cyclist was weaving side-to-side."

"The D850 would sometimes, mid-burst, lose track of the subject it had initially been tracking. This happened both in the middle of the autofocus area, as above, and also near the edges (usually at the apex of a turn, indicating a change in approach speed to the camera). It happened regardless of whether the camera's 'Subject Motion' parameter of 'Focus tracking with lock-on' was set to Erratic, Steady, or in-between."

"the D850 is certainly capable of tracking extremely well, but there appears to be some other factor(s) at play holding it back."

In terms of subject tracking, we continue to be perplexed by our experiences with 3D Tracking (...) despite Nikon's claims of D5 levels of performance, we collectively find the D850 to be somewhat lagging behind that lofty benchmark."

I asked for a comparison between the subject tracking capabilities of the two cameras, from a person who actually tested them both. It's not the same as simply reading the reviews and trying to come to a conclusion...

For what it's worth, I've done a fair amount of the AF testing on both cameras. I'd say that the D850's 3D tracking is ahead of Sony's Lock-On AF, but the D850 doesn't have anything approaching Sony's Eye AF, which evens the playing field somewhat. Hope that's helpful.

There's no need to send anyone here back to their taxi. And I addressed to you because your argument to Yxa (saying that my question could be answered by simply reading both reviews) is flawed, so get over it.

For what it's worth - although you didn't want my take on it what I deduced from reading both tests was that DPR considers Nikon's 3D tracking to be the gold standard, but for reasons unknown the D850 has a fallible implementation of it. Sony's tracking is getting better but isn't as good and can't be relied on in critical instances. Eye-AF is even better with this camera.

LMAO, I love how quickly you review some cameras over others. I'm sure this camera is incredible, but it takes you guys months of actual testing to reach conclusions on some cameras...and then this isn't even available for purchase, so I assume you made your final conclusions from the all expenses paid Sony trip everyone was on this past week?

How about long term reviews? I'm tired of these cameras 'on paper' reviews and final conclusions reached after a weekend or two. Put this in the hands of someone who makes their living with a camera. Give them a month or so to use it on weekly paid assignments and hear back. This camera has the chance to really be Sony's world beating body and everyone on the internet has already reviewed it without spending professional time with it.

Depends on how long DPR has had it, which is quite possibly longer than it has been publicly available. For example one of the Olympus cams had a full review the day of release. It also matters how different the camera is. This one for example is roughly the same sensor as before, and a combination of two already existing bodies.

The only problem with Sony FF mirrorless is they still do not offer 35/2 AF and 135/2 primes. I am not interested in the monster 35/1.4 and in f2.8/35mm.Lack of 135/2 prime is enough reason for no buy.

@Mateus1A 135/1.8 GM is rumoured and should be in the next batch of releases. In the meantime you can buy the 135/2.8 Batis, which is apochromatically corrected and appears to be the best 135 on the market.

A 35/2 Batis is highly likely - they have released 18/25/85 and 135mm focal lengths.

If Sony is not interested in making a decent FF mirrorless system with a couple of nice compact & light AF primes, hopefully Canon/Nikon will fill the gap soon. In fact, the day Canon/Nikon introduces a FF mirrorless with a compact & light AF 35mm 1.8/2.0 , a small zoom and a decent adapter for their existing AF glass, the whatever Sony mirrorless becomes immediately obsolete, no matter how short or long the Canon/Nikon body feature list is ! Technically, Canon/Nikon's new FF mirrorless bodies just needs to level with their own DSLRs and it will immediately be a commercial bingo ... The second hand market will be flooded with Sony mirrorless bodies & lenses.

Please! Clarify. How do you made a review with a camera that will be available for consumer only in November 30th? Is your camera a market finished version? All in all, you gave it a score above Nikon 850 even with its "star eaten" allegedly restriction. How do you compare it to Nikon 850? How many stops of shaking compensation has it at the telephoto (above 200mm) range? Is it fair to evaluate shaking at 50mm?

Dear friends above. You didn't understand me. No, I'm not a Nikon user. I'm a Canon user, and I have a Sony a9 ready to use. My question about shaking is that I consider to measure shaking at 50mm unfair. By the other hand, we know that only sensor stabilization is not enough when it comes to long focal length, except to in mgrum unique experience. So, is useless to measure stabilization at 50mm, because rarely we need stabilization at this focal range. Calm down! I only questioned some aspects of the review and the so called "star eaten black hole" effect at long exposure, above 4 seconds, in arii and a7riii. I know the wise men above do not agree with me!

@Ruy, you might know that the FE mount uses both body and lens IS. Then it all depends if the tele have the IS built in. I am not going to claim that Brand A is better than B, but clearly the combo of body and lens IS is more interesting and flexible than lens only IS.

e.g. old manual lens can have IS, row stabilization by the body with lens IS correcting the pitching movement, etc.

Again you seem to be picking arguments, 50mm rarely need stabilization (for argument sake, I agree with you). Then by applying the same logic, photographers rarely also have to take pictures where star-eater becomes an issue.

50mm with IS is still beneficial to me, I could take dusk shorts without tripod or ISO 1600. The more options available to me, the better I can execute my shot.

Do you mean anti-rolling shutter? The readout speed of the A9 is what allows it to avoid rolling shutter. Writing high resolution photos would require even faster readout than the A9, so I'd say unlikely.

I think there's an error/omission in the text and specs in this review which indicates there is " 425 on-sensor phase detection AF points" the Sony spec states 399 PDAF (as A7RM2) and 425 CDAF (up from 25). It would have been good to see some mention of the effect of the change to the CDAF spec. and how tis impacts the hybrid focusing, as well as a mention of the way the camera focuses stopped down.

If this only had the colors, skin tones, I see from Canon it would be perfect for what I want. I’m not trolling, I am currently debating on getting my first ff & it’s between this and the Mark 4. Such a hard choice, I really love everything about this camera and the available quality lenses gets better each day. The D850 looks great as well, just not what I want or need.

I agree. I don’t understand the Sony fascination to be honest. I immediately wrote off the Canon 6d II because just about every review said bottom line image quality was average at best and dynamic range was below average. I was able to pick up one last week on loan from a friend and shot all week with it and my mind was blown at how beautiful the image quality is, in fact in just about every way it’s improved over the original 6D which I used to own. I am starting to believe that reviews are heavily tainted depending upon advertising. Maybe Sony is in bed with DXO ? No clue. Maybe it’s all nothing, either way these days I take all of these reviews with a giant grain of salt.

The only thing this FF camera has over the Nikon and Canons is its size and its sensor is good for DR, but cannot match Canon for color reproduction. Keep in mind that once a larger lens is attached to this camera, the logic for a small FF camera body goes out the window because it will get heavier with fast glass. This would also be true when Canon and Nikon come out with FF mirrorless bodies. So it comes down to ergonomics and color reproduction, which is superior with Canon. I would try out the Sony and Canon in the hand before purchase. I think you will fond the Canon superior for extended shooting IMO.

Canon has amazingly good color. Color is one of the key ingredients of image quality. If you do color photography, good color is very important! The more high-level the usage, the better the color needs to be.

Canon's excellent color is evident even in DPR's Studio Scene, though no one seems to comment on it. It seems that all the Sony fans can think about is that 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-stop push test, as if that is more important than anything.

@mpb002'The only thing this FF camera has over the Nikon and Canons is its size and its sensor is good for DR, but cannot match Canon for color reproduction. '

Ah, the cult of Canon in full swing! Worse gear on the market in technical reviews, gauging their customer base with incredibly expensive under-featured cameras: the 5D4 has been on the market a year and still costs $200 more than this camera! There isn't a single area where it is even on par.

Sony can't match Canon colour? You're really deluding yourself. Canon is becoming a cult where people talk about unquantifiable things because the quantifiable ones reflect the brand in such a bad light.

Sony has given you the chance to get eye-AF at 3fps with your Canon lenses adapted on this body. I would take it.

@mpb002 ... and better video, IBIS, eye-AF, pixel shift and EVF. I’m not bashing Canon (I’m a Canon user) but I can’t deny how impressive this camera is. The D850 is also very good. If o was starting again I’d pick Sony.

@RubberDials The 5D4 is now as low as $2,950 from an authorized dealer, or just $2,550 gray market. One dealer has a bundle for $2,849 (after rebate) that includes Canon's grip and a Canon printer. As for Canon Color, just check DPR's Studio Scene.

when people talk about this brand colour is better than other, i just assumed they are lazy, leaving everything on default and never ever shot raw and do post processing. Because of my personal experience, default colours is nothing when you can do proper post processing or fiddle with camera setting, in pp i can match any other cameras colour, not even took 3 minutes.

@bakanecko Your assumption is not correct. I spend days and days working on thousands of Raw photos. I have worked with Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fuji, Leica and Olympus Raw files from numerous weddings and other events. Having Canon's excellent color as a starting point is a real pleasure. No doubt color is partly a matter of personal preference, and I have found most times that I prefer Canon's color. So I'm happy getting Canon's color right from the start, rather than trying to "match" it. Anyone can check the DPR Studio Scene and see for themselves (if they're not too busy looking at 5-stop pushes).

@Retro, technology is a figures war. And all these new stuff are REALLY making us lazy. You dont want to bother with your subject? NP, just hold the camera and eye focus will track.You dont want to bother with composition? NP, you have 50 MP, crop like a dog, will be fine.You dont want to work on light? NP, you have 15 dynamic stop. Not a big deal if you forgot to switch on the light...

About the 6d II I worked a bit on raws from here and from J. Polin and in most situation it seems a very usable camera. But it is probably too expensive...

I decided myself for a used 5dIV. I keep my canon lenses (you loose things with adapters on the Sony and low light conditions is problematic. My 135 f/2 will be in trouble). 30mp is fine and i already feel some slow down processing files on my iPad Pro 10.5 (and SD card filling faster too).At 1500€, I think the 6dII could be a nice option (2100€ is too much).

Wow People sacrifice a whole lot to get "Canon Out of Camera JPG Color". For me, I would much rather have the benefits of non sharpness ruining AA filterless sensors, BSI, Stacked Technology, Off sensor ADC Sensors - resulting in improved dynamic range, banding performance, signal to noise perf., etc. (I can get the "Color" I want with a few adjustments of my Raw photos in Lightroom...)

@yake personally i matched if i need to but for personal use, i use my own setting which never is default from camera manufactures. So brand's colour is meaningless to me. I do this with every camera i owned, Nikon, Fuji, Sony, and Canon.

@Yake - I have thousands of Raw images taken with my 5DSR and my A7RII and I'm sure if I were to select random images for you (as has been done on the internet and YouTube hundreds of times before), you wouldn't be able to reliably tell which camera produced the RAW photo (processed subsequently through your RAW converter of choice [Lightroom, Luminar, Phase ONE Products, Etc.] giving it their own set of "colors" along the way to the files)... Canon shooters for some reason try to conflate "pleasing JPEG colors" performance over to Canon RAW files. The Perspective of a Canon & Sony shooter...

DPR”Our 'imprecision' hypothesis stems also from our observation of AF being 'jumpy' - even for static subjects, it's easy to see the focus distance scale on the lens jumping back and forth as if the camera is constantly taking a reading and thinking the subject may be out of focus”That said, at the center point's claimed minimum of -4 EV, we could only get a focus lock with high-contrast subjects, even with lenses using both AF systems. This puts it a couple of stops behind the performance of our benchmark - the Nikon D750”

Can the battery be charged, in-camera, via the USB-C port? The review seems to indicate "yes", but I've heard it can only maintain power (and not charge) in other reviews. Trying to eliminate my need for dated micro-USB cables!

Fake reviews, Bronze at best. It is not mFT therefore a dinosaur. Too big, Too heavy, the lenses are inferior compared to "equivalent" mFT. mFT is the future. This is a step backwards. Embrace your inner dinosaur if you want to purchase one of these Dead Camera System walking. Or.. you can be the bearded, hipster your inner child screams for, and get yourself an mFT camera.

You are probably joking but I would say most M43 users are not hipsters at all. In fact I don't remember seeing a single profile photo on a popular M43 forum where a long bearded hipster was pictured. However, I have been thinking of making a similar post on the next full frame review like this since the full frame fans who potentially are trying to compensate for some other personal inferiority cant let a single m43 announcement go by without justifying their big cameras with some mention of full frame equivalence. I say this owning a full frame A7R2 and apsc xt2 and M43 E-M1mii and appreciating the benefits of each system.

This Sony is definitely smaller than most full frames in body and lens designs for the functionality and sensor size so its harder to put up a good argument here.

I beg to disagree. M43 is an itty bitty sized sensor. Size is everything in photography. Big lenses, big bodies, big sensors. Shot M43 above ISO 800 and you are greeted by grain the size of pebbles. I do get the appeal of M43; small body, small lenses. But to me, it is a poor excuse for a photographic tool. Man/woman up, carry the weight and work out your arms, legs and whole body. If you want to win a drag race, don't bring a teeny souped up1.5L Honda 4 banger engine against a twin-turbocharged Chevy big block. It's that simple.

Yeah Randy, you're right! Let's get all the people with arthritis, Parkinson's, tendinitis, bad backs and the like to the gym, they're just a bunch of pussies!

Seriously, I like large cameras too, but the smaller kits have enabled a lot of older or physically compromised people to enjoy photography for a longer time. Furthermore, many of these people produce spectacular photos, and would be a real loss for the medium otherwise.

Not wanting to start a war - but why does the Canon not get a green box for resolution in the specs compared table, since 50 is more than the others? Seems like unneeded Canon bashing. Not that 50MP is significant, just feels weird that it was not marked as such.

@Anulu, "Because 5DsR is high resolution with awful IQ, ..." Huh? Which web site are you reading? Certainly not DPReview. Because on DPReview, the Studio Scene shows that the 5DsR has superior image quality to any of those other cameras. Look at the woodcut etching, the 20 Schilling note, the tubes of paint, etc. It is clear that the 5DsR's extra pixels give it an edge.

@Waldo yeah, the table certainly has some bias in it. Note the high ISO also isn't really fairly highlighted and this is also an important attribute. Likewise, weight and size you'd think would be favorably highlighted for Sony. Oh well, there's always some bias in any comparison.

@Anulu, Yes, really. So you seem to define image quality *as a whole* with that ridiculous 5-stop push and with ultra high ISO. That is absolutely ridiculous.

The 5DsR offers *magnificent* image quality useful for a vast range of professional work. i"m talking about real-world photography, not some measurbating fantasy world. This is supported by the Studio Scene, in which you conveniently ignore ALL normal settings in order to isolate the ridiculous ones. This is your basis for calling the 5DsR's IQ "awful". That is laugh-out-loud absurd.

How much of professional photography do you think is done with 5-stop pushes or ISO 12,800? Every day, photographers around the planet fill books, magazines, art galleries, advertisements, newspapers, etc. with countless photos that were not made with 5-stop pushes or ISO 12,800. I've managed to do some 40 years of photography and a million+ photos without 5-stop pushes or ISO 12,800.

Someone mentioned that 5dsr is 50mp with awful image quality. I thoroughly disagree with this, and I am a Nikon shooter.

My friend has one of these 5dsr and I frequently have used it. It produces fab photos with lovely straight out of camera shots in a lot of cases. Shooting raw gives you flexibility to pull stuff back etc but this cameras rendering in jpegs is generally imo very pleasant.

Now if something is pushed, pulled 5 stops etc it might be a different story, but as was said above, numbers cripple the 6d2 on paper, but the photos it makes are lovely.

The original 5d was/is a lovely image maker, but it's numbers on paper make it look crappy

@YakeYou misunderstand, this differences are not only at 5 stop push and high iso, this differences very noticable in the real world use and the whole settings range. 5DsR has much worse IQ for a higher price than competition, also have much less color depth (yes in the whole settings range :D ) + 5DsR is an outdated body against Sony a7RII, a7RIII. As i said it's they are not in the same league. Sorry but this is the truth, deal with it :)

@Anulu, You keep trying to sell that falsehood. No one is buying it. You are all about that 5-stop push, Sony's one claim to fame. The Studio Scene shows plenty in Canon's favor, but you deny it. Worse, you claim Canon's IQ is "awful" — a big fat lie.

As someone who's had to repeatedly edit 5DSR images at work, yes, as Canon stated, it has the same IQ as their (at the time) APS-C sensors. Very limited DR (even for Canon), and very noisy for FF at high ISO. If you shoot JPG, or do very limited editing and/or multi-image HDR, it's fine. If you're trying to use it like a 80D/1DX II/5D IV sensor (not even Sony level), you won't be happy.

"I used Anulu's comparison, but changed the ISO to a more reasonable 400. Interestingly the A7r Mk 3 is the worst of the four at that ISO."

It's not, you just cherry picked. Despite the fact that ISO 400 is the second worst ISO to shoot the A7RIII, scroll a little around to the color chart and you can see that the 5DSR still is worse in every color except one of the blue and one of the red patches:

@randomguy, The 5DsR has the best, richest, most life-like color in every part of the scene at every ISO from 100 to 3200. At ISO 6400 and above color noise starts to diminish the 5DsR's color. The D850 is a close second. The Sony cameras only stand out as best in the ISO 12,800 and above range (which Anulu was keen to point out).

"@randomguy, The 5DsR has the best, richest, most life-like color in every part of the scene at every ISO from 100 to 3200."

Color is subjective, everybody can have their own opinions. In my opinion the 5DSR colors in that scene is not particularly rich nor life-like. I do see more noise than all other cameras in almost every color patch though, which means there is less room to edit the image in post to make the colors "richer" and more "life-like".

Truth to be told, it's only hearsay on forums that Sony's weather sealing is lacking compared to the big DSLRs (that is logical as they are bigger, and therefore have more space to insert sealing parts).

All the previous A7 series have so far had inadequate weather and dust sealing compared to similarily priced mirrored parties - and have therefore failed on people who have accustomed to Nikon/Canon pro body level weather sealing.

This has been documented by many reliable user, if you care to go through internets. Dpreview itself just had a news about lens rentals disassembling an A7 that had been destroyed by a splash of salt water.

Now, I cannot compare this to other mirrorless priced similarily. In mirrorless world A7 series might be well weather sealed.

I personally do not care about Sony after one ridiculously poorly built NEX-6 failed on me. Also, I find A7 to be an odd ball that its body is not really fitting to my hands, but the lenses are in general as big as for my Nikon. If Sony would make something slightly bigger and better in erconomics with weather sealing I can trust on, I might reconsider them again.

Just for your annoyance, here is the direct quote from Lens rental's report about A7sII:

"Trusting ‘weather resistance’ is risky business.

They all say they have it. But none of them define what it is or how much they have. This camera had easy water access from the battery door, the entire bottom, and around the camera strap lugs that we showed you. It also has two rotating dials that you can pour water through, but this splash didn’t hit those. The viewfinder and hot shoe are a bit leaky, too."

It is, but my D700 has gone through such weather that I know it truly is weather sealed. Since I got newer body, I have not really felt much sorry for it. And my friend has washed his 5D under running water several times. Looking at those A7 pics, and nope, don't try that with A7.

And I know that A7 series are great cameras otherwise, but I think Sony is really pulling us with this particular marketing thing. Unless they have really improved it with A7rIII, which remains to be seen.

From reading the comments on here over several years I've learned that the ideal camera must be 'weather-sealed' and built to 'pro' standards with a 'ruggedized grip' for 'large hands' and near infinite battery life. There are no dictats on image quality or features beyond the ruddy caucasian pink of 'Canon colours'.

From this I deduce that most DPR readers live in America, in remote rural environments with very inclement weather and no proximity to electricity and are engaged in a perpetual stake-out of their subject matter.

Funny. My first D7100 died a quick death in a downpour with a 70-200 VR II (not damaged). One of Nikon's fun little claims, where they said it had the same weather sealing as the D800. Lucky for them, it didn't.

Umeet is blowing smoke. It was a rental returned damaged. The author really doesn’t know what happened. It clearly wasn’t “A little splash”. The salt was caked inside. No splash contains that much salt. This was obviously at least partially submerged for some period of time...

All over europe sony is now shipping each A7R iii with a 5 year free fall, bump and water warranty i guess that helps. It also means they feel that they did the calculations and assume very few will breakdown when getting a little wet.

I think some testers already proofed that there was (surprise surprise) very poor weather sealing at the bottom of A7r3, which made it fail in their rain test, where other tested cameras survived. I am pretty sure that even DPreview managed to make a news story about that test.

@DPREVIEW: Thanks for a great review as usual. I always take yours as the "official review".You listed "Still need a grip for long lens" as Con. Is there something that Sony can improve or should improve? The grip is improved on A7rII and slightly more A7rIII. What would be a "ultimate" grip design/size you recommend for this type of camera? I personally like Panasonic GH4 grip. I suggest that the grip be a bit taller, not changing the overall size(dimensions on the spec), just the right shoulder higher.

For what it's worth, I think the height increase is the solution I'd choose as well. But I understand that they are striking a carefully considered balance of size and ergonomics in this camera.

This grip extender is a little overpriced and seems silly, but makes the camera far more comfortable to hold - plus you don't have to remove it completely for it to swivel out of the way to allow for battery swapping:

+Sdaniella The unsold new inventory of A7RII is still $2,400...right? Yes the used market means you are buying something with risk but you can also score some very good deals if you shop smartly with shutter actuations and a reputable seller.

Awful ergonomics, depending on who you are. Some people are actually capable of adapting to new things.

500 pics per charge if you're CIPA. This should be the low end, as I can easily match and beat CIPA's ratings on my A6300s at weddings.

Go to 8fps if you want to see more movement. Still faster than competitors.

Except on the eyes. ;) Though it does heavily depend on the lens. Should be interesting to see if adapted lenses get a performance boost from the new battery, like they do on the A9.

Have you personally tested the weather sealing? I've had my A6300s snow/ice encrusted for two winters with no problems. And there's no mount sealing on those (or my adapters). Probably don't want to dunk them in a fish tank, though.

Agree with the others. Quite impressive. Sony has developed an all around camera system in 7 years to compete with the best cameras commercially available. In 7 more years, the DSLR will be killed by this technology.

I'm looking at the in depth resolution page and truly realizing that we have come to the point where enough is enough. The detail crops are amazing, but who will ever look that deep into an image other than a forensic photographer.

It's time to stop increasing megapixels, 25 is enough for most everything, as we near 50 we're cover for the most demanding applications, but I can't think of them. Whats the point? 80 on the new Panasonic G9, for what?

Let's talk about 20 megapixels at 128,000 ISO without grain or noise and I'll get excited.

It's easier to retouch blemishes when they cover a lot of pixels because you can smooth out the skin more realistically. With lower MP you are stuck sometimes having to clone over good skin because you can't differentiate between the margin of the spot and healthy tissue and the result looks like a fried egg on a plate.

I'd like more MP than the 24 in my A7 because I want more cropping room for shooting wildlife. The down side is there are no really good very long glass for FE mount. I currently use a 500mm f4.5L and put up with manual focus. I could adapt Canon or Alpha lenses I suppose, but I wish I could afford the A7Riii now. The alternative (not a bad one really) is a smaller sensor that "crops" for you and narrows the field of view. The G9 looks good, but actually thinking about trying a G7 or XT-1 with my 500mm. The down side is the smaller sensor has more noise as the light fades. The upside is that it's faster, lighter, smaller, cheaper, and actually has several reasonably priced native lenses that give over 500mm equiv. FOV. I don't see why sensor makers wouldn't continue to improve senor resolution, DR, high ISO, and read speed. There is no end in sight because they are made with the same fundamental technology as CPUs which roughly follow moore's law---doubling in power every two years.

A nice feature of the R3 is you can program an external button to shift from FF to APS-C - effectively zooming you 1.5x, if you don't mind dropping from 42 MP to 18 MP. With a 400mm, it's a jump to 600mm. I think I'll be using it.

Cropping seems like an excuse for not having the right lens or camera. I understand reach for wildlife, but that's when a 24 megapixel APC camera is called for. If you are doing a lot of cropping I see the need for more data, but then you have all that extra data to store. Also, cropping isn't using lenses to their full potential. A Cropped image is different than the same image taken with a longer lens from the same spot.

What you say is true, although I was referring to "cropping in the field" by dropping to 18 MP APS-C on the a7R3, not taking FF @ 42MP and cropping when I get home, so there is no extra data to store. But long lenses get expensive and heavy in a hurry. So, rather than pack a 600mm, I can take a walk to my local pond with the relatively light and inexpensive Canon 400 f/5.6 (+Metabones V), it can be nice to zoom in to 600mm occasionally. In the past, I enjoyed the a6300 for its reach, but this feature of the aR73 gives me the best of both worlds in one body. (I can sacrifice the pixel count from 24 to 18 occasionally). The question will be whether the a7R3 can give me the very quick focus of the a6300. Seems that it will be quick enough.

Increase in resolution is good as long as the IQ remains the same or better than the previous version. Anyone that does anything with their images will know that cropping is always involved in the final output.

Anyway this is the R version so complaining about resolution is like saying Coca Cola has too much sugar. Go drink diet.

@Thomas Kachadurian Having a constrained hobby budget is more real excuse for not having the "right" camera or lens. ;) If reach was my only priority, there are super zooms with ultimate equiv. mm reach. There are other drawbacks of course to those systems. I have a FF because of other values, but I purchased the FD500mm f4.5L because it was a bargain--the biggest glass I could afford. The main reason I purchased that lens is because I can't afford AF big glass like a 400mm or 600mm prime. Those would be the right lenses. :) But for me, I'm just going to buy a XT-1 or G7 to act like teleconverters on my 500mm. I think an A7rii might be in the cards someday as the price is pushed down. The cropping room would be similar to using a 16mp crop sensor on my lens. Bottom line is that us folks wanting to do wildlfe on a budget have to use every tool we have to maximize value--that includes trade offs.

Forgot to mention that for those of us using large MF glass, framing with a wider FOV and cropping after sometimes makes it easier because you can locate the subject in the viewfinder without needing to optimize framing. There is also an assumption that people shooting with a crop sensor are cured of wanting to crop afterward--which just isn't the case. No matter what format I am using, I'm often cropping the to the full extent that the file can handle (and nearly always cropping for composition at the least).

What Dr Blackjack said.I miss the old days when at least major internet outlets were not afraid of causing offense to a brand and called a spade a spade.I can't blame DPR for not doing it, though, since everyone else is the same and these are tough times for the media.

The appearance of an a7R III in the a9's body makes me assume the opposite; that the (much more expensive) a9 will stay out on its own and the a7 series will continue to include the top-of-the-range high Res camera.

If the A7rIII is it for high resolution then that means we are probably waiting 2 or more years for more than 42mp. If Sony has a higher resolution sensor ready or one that will be ready in the next year or so I think we could see the A9r. I don't think Sony can justify the A9r and two high res models without a new sensor. But if the sensor is there I think there are plenty of ways to differentiate the A9r from the A7rIII and the A9r would sell but it has to start with a higher resolution sensor which may or may not be an option.

This is really a watershed moment for Canon/Nikon as companies. This is the camera where strikes their bread and butter and it is truly standing on its own. The downsides of mirrorless have practically been mitigated with latest updates while DSLRs are standing still. I would still grab a DSLR like the Pentax K1 for extreme weather but for everything else a A7r3 is indeed a better package.

Which comes back to my previous system: Micro Four Thirds. Oly/Pana have to wake up and smell the money to notice that their clunky huge cameras, with tiny sensors, low resolution and laughable higher ISOs, have to be re imagined to compete with something this small that delivers this amount of IQ. It is time for the Micro Four Thirds cameras to return to their roots and know their place: cheaper, smaller, lower IQ cameras for the masses who are interested in ditching their phones.

1 inch sensors are really going to eat their lunch since IQ is so comparable to be difficult to tell the difference.

I agree with most of your comments here. Micro 4/3 is at a crossroads where they need to either reemphasize smaller and cheaper -or- 4/3 sensor technology needs to make a big jump in some way to improve resolution, dynamic range, etc so that they can continue to find people willing to shell out for expensive cameras and big and expensive lenses. Otherwise, Sony, Fuji (and maybe at some point Nikon and Canon) will take more of those customers that have been buying the big and expensive m4/3 gear. If that happens and if micro 4/3 has continued to mostly neglect the small and less expensive end of the market then they will be in a difficult place. Then again with the continued pressure from advanced compacts and smartphones it may be hard to sell enough of the smaller and cheaper gear which may be why both Olympus and Panasonic have been releasing more higher end expensive gear lately. Micro 4/3 is in a tough spot all the way around right now.

Agreed about Oly/Panny. I don't think Oly can do anything; Sony would block it. However, Panasonic has already developed a state-of-the-art full frame system with the Leica SL. It is about time they open this system up to people who don't want to pay the 500% Leica surcharge.

Oh, man, I missed m43 bashing. Hard to imagine, more than 100 posts and nobody mentioned how bad pana/oly are...

Yes, Sony made a great photo machine. Yes, full frame inherently has better IQ than sensor 4 times smaller. So what? Olympus/Panasonic should go ahead and break a law of physics or two and make something to beat A7SII low light performance, right?

Each system has its strong and weak points. It's a nice thing to be able to chose.

I think you are missing the point and instead getting emotional about a camera format or brand. You are right that each system has its strong and weak points but those strong points for micro 4/3 are diminishing one by one and that is the point. They either need to focus on their remaining strengths or they need to work on the weaknesses. That is not m4/3 bashing, just common sense.

@turretless - Nobody was basking m4/3rds They were just commenting on the difficult position they are in.

Remember its a fact that m4/3rs has worst low light, dynamic range, and bit depth of any platform. The camera bodies and lenses are nice, but there is no getting around the low picture quality. (I own olympus) Speeds of FF and AF are improving - thats what they are mentioning.

@Clayton1985I'm not sure what you mean "those strong points for micro 4/3 are diminishing one by one". My e-m1 (NOT mark II) works as good now as it worked the day I bought it. And it still makes pictures, which are more than satisfactory for my purposes. And my whole package, lenses and all still can fit into a bag which used to hold 5DII and one L lens.

The real problem with m43rds are the crazy prices they (mostly Olympus) are charging for their smaller websites cameras. M43rds needs to upgrade to 14-bit processing and BSI before they can be considered professional and make a jump up in dynamic range, etc. to compete better with Sony and fuji’s Mirror less offerings.

@turretless... Again, the emotional attachment is nice but has nothing to do with a conversation about how someone might choose to buy a camera or buy into a system or upgrade when they are ready to upgrade with the various options that they have today. Why the fact that you are happy with your E-M1 matters is beyond me. You are the one that mentioned strong and weak points... can you have "strong and weak points" if you're only comparing the E-M1 to the E-M1? Get real... it seems that you're too emotionally tied to your brand and your format. I'm also happy with my previous generation camera and I like apple pie but I don't know what either has to do with this conversation.

m4/3 has the smallest sensor and the worst of image quality of the bunch, but let's look at it another way. Is it good enough for 95% of the folks shooting now? Most probably.

If sensor size was the end all and be all of cameras then we'd all be talking about how the A7R3 was doomed to failure because the Fuji GFX was going to eat its lunch someday.

All systems have a range of sizes to offer, and some combinations start to not make rational sense at all, but for compactness and lens availability, the m4/3 ecosystem is still pretty compelling. Yes you can get larger sized bodies and lenses to start competing with the bigger sensors too, that's part of the strength and vibrancy of the m4/3 system.

I shoot Sony, Oly and Canon regularly so I have no dog in this fight. Just waiting on better adapter firmware for the A7R3 so it focuses quickly on my EF long lenses and I'll probably upgrade.

"It is time for the Micro Four Thirds cameras to return to their roots and know their place: cheaper, smaller, lower IQ cameras for the masses who are interested in ditching their phones."I wish they would - but the reason they switched to premium in the first place was because of falling sales - so they jumped on the 'premium' bandwagon which has been working well for Fuji & Sony. Unless they see sufficient demand I don't see things changing, except for perhaps taking advantage of the size/weight savings they can make.

I'm not sure i agree with this POV. The advantage of the M43 cameras was never in the body size but in the lens size at long focal lengths. Compare a 300 mm focal length (600mm FOV equivelant on FF) with that of a full frame lens of that fov and speed and you'll find its much much much bigger on the full frame lens. Furthermore the small size of the sensor conveys many other advantages including incredibly capable IBIS. The price differences are also immense. A top of the line m43 body is £1499. That of the Sony A7r3 is 3199. There's a market for both. The nose characteristics of the smaller sensor aren't bad at all though obviously they don't compete. I have never gone beyond iso 3200 so I don't need anything faster. Frankly I can see a situation where owning an M43 and a medium format makes more sense.

The advantage of m4/3 in the early going certainly was in the body size as well as the lenses and IBIS. Now, over time, the body size, lens weight and size and IBIS are all not the advantages they once were because there are small aps-c and full frame cameras with very capable IBIS and a variety of lenses of all sizes and weights and growing by the day. Yes, micro 4/3 still has some advantages in the areas you mention but they aren't what they once were which is only going to increase pressure on micro 4/3. Yes if you want a 300mm f4 lens with the performance limitations that go along with that lens mounted to a micro 4/3 sensor then that is a selling point but I doubt the number of people that want that combination of trade offs is enough to keep micro 4/3 going and growing.

My last holdouts: ergonomics, service and support, lens QA. ... and sometimes I like an OVF though I accept I may be the minority there. When Canikon release their FF mirrorless they still beat Sony to the punch resolving my wishlist. It ain't over yet.

I've seen many an image from an Olympus 300mm and am struggling to identify the performance limitations especially when one can handhold it due to the ibis performance. I'm not an m43 fanboy but people are remarkably quick to dismiss a system. Why not dismiss the aps (Fuji systems) for example. They don't even have the lens size/weight advantages that the m43 does but have many of the disadvantages of the bigger cameras and lenses and there's nothing between a Fuji XT-2 and an Olympus omd-em1 mk2 (I own neither btw) dynamic range/image quality wise. To me the size/weight and cost advantages not to mention the better ibis systems of the smaller cameras still hold true. Unless you absolutely need to print to very large print sizes, then there isn't much need for higher resolution or image quality than the current crop of m43/aps cameras. For fine art landscape photographers who go massive on printing, I can see a need but then they will be better served by medium/large format.

and again the comments on 12 bit vs 14 bit processing path and professionals using the system I'm not sure I see either. There are of course advantages to a 14 bit capability but there are many fine professionals taking stunning images which to be frank don't suffer by dint of their 12 bit processing. fruthermore comments on dynamic range are somewhat moot as just one review I found pointed out in a comparison between the olympus omd-em12 and the fuji xt-2. As I said why focus on M43 and ignore aps? If the problem is smaller sensors than full frame then sure they are a disadvantage though for most photographers you'd be hard pushed to tell. In most cases the limiting factor is the poor dumb shmuck holding the camera rather than the equipment.

I don't think it should be treated as m43 bashing. I think people have prejudices. I've shot with both M43 and FF (Sony a7R/Cannon 5d2) and frankly i think my images were better with the M43. I also found that i got less tired after a day yomping round the moors. The Sony was nice with Leica lenses but then you lost autofocus and the costs were obscene. For the most part my images out of the m43 were sharper and they were better compositions too. perhaps it was a mindset thing. I'm not actually arguing that the m43 is better than the Fuji either. For the most part these machines are so close to one another that you need extreme use cases to really pick one over another. Are all of these people really making 60 and larger plus inch prints taken in near darkness with some ridiculous highlight which means you really need a 14 bit or better processing path to ensure colour gradations.

While at the high end, the value of M4/3 is indeed becoming dubious; at every other point on the market, it is much more affordable, and I believe that will continue to be its niche going forward. Of course, M4/3 will continue to have a niche in small camera cinematography, such as aerial drone applications.

All of these 3 should perform similarly, although Nikon and Sony shooter would likely go with better glass than this, it just gives near equivalent shooting speeds for similar image quality and focal length.

There isn't much weight savings but the Oly is still the lightest, but the price sure stings a lot less. Better glass on the FF Nikon and FF Sony would push the price point even higher, but m4/3 isn't exactly out of the fight yet.Nikon 2.1kg, $7250Sony 1.5kg, $5600Olympus 1.33kg $3000

@otto k: The light isn't actually infrared, at least on my speedlights, because if it were truly infrared it would be an invisible death-blasting heat ray rather than a visible and very helpful focusing aid. The light is about the color of a cherry cough drop but it does work magically well. I wish I could figure out how to have it on all the time.

@Carey - I don't think you understood me. With DSLR/DSLT AF module is separate and not covered by IR filter and can use IR light for AF. With on sensor AF (both PDAF and CDAF) IR light never reaches the sensor (because of IR filter). What we need is a green light projector, preferably patterned.Just like lenses should be optimized for mirrorless, so should the flashes.

Jay Kelbley: I believe it is rated to EV-4 for contrast and EV-2 for P.D. But the tradeoff isn't in the size of the phase-detect sensors, as you move from off-chip to on-chip. It comes in wavelength. So with the DSLR phase-detect sensors, you can run those wide open. You can run them into infrared, and that's what most designers do. So if you look at DSLR autofocus assist lights, many are running red-infrared, which is less obtrusive. The autofocus assist lights are generally red-infrared, but if you go on-chip you have the IR blocking filter on the image sensor, so on-sensor you can't use IR sensing for autofocus any more.... JK: And so, the right strategy for on-chip AF assist ends up being visible spectrum, or in our case we've been using green lights for a long time.

In any case, at the recommendation of our technical editor, I've amended the 'con.' My initial use of the term 'infrared' was incorrect. Basically, Canon and Nikon speedlights are generally able to project a fairly unobtrusive red 'grid' of light at a great distance that aids the camera's autofocus system in low light situations. It's not as bright or distracting as the on-camera AF assist lamp, and more effective. As it stands, Sony doesn't have a competing solution at this time.

Sony AF assist light seems to be reddish/orangish (visible spectrum), but it's blocked by all but the smallest lenses. Even if the light is visible by the sensor, the pattern is probably blocked by the lens. Adding more powerful AF assist lights (unobstructed by lenses) to Sony flashes could really add some value to the system.

Otto- interesting that Samsung used green, I never paid attention to that when I had NX cameras.

They do have it! But the reality is even worse, because only A-mount cameras have access to the AF assist light on flashguns. Why E-mount cameras are excluded seems terribly arbitrary and makes no sense.

Yeah, I saw the article shortly after posting here. Thanks for the extra attention to the star eating problem, it is much appreciated!

And yes, I guess it's hard to test the weather sealing indeed. I wonder why Sony itself doesn't address the issue and helps to disperse doubts by demo-ing it. I don't want my camera to switch off when standing next to a waterfall i constant spray, that'd be really annoying. And from what I've heard from other landscapers it is an issue with the previous iterations of the camera.

Exactly. I bought an A9 immediately after it was available in stores, earlier this year. Sony didn't even give enough time and a chance for the A9 to be selected the Camera of the Year (CotY), since the A7RIII is really the CotY, I agree. I am not sorry, since I am happy with the A9, but I can say that the A7RIII is not only less expensive, but has USB3, larger sensor, S-Log video, which makes it even more appealing option for those who don't need 20FPS.So, very true, Sony A7RIII is competing vs the A9. Maybe all A9 owners have some "sour feel in our mouth" when we see that some of these feature didn't come into the A9. Canon pays much more attention to these policies. No way an advanced features comes into a cheaper model at Canon.

Dual pixel AF first came to the Canon 70D. Touch screen came on the 600D from memory. Articulating screen came on the 60D and STILL isn’t on a 5D or 1D. 5D IV gets C-Log but the 1DX II doesn’t (while there is no 1DC replacement). Speaking of 1DC, it doesn’t get AF upgrade that the 1DX got, even though it was 2x as expensive. 50/60p 1080p came on lower models before 5D series. WiFi on low end models WELL before 5D/1D series (does 1DX II have WiFi?).

I just wanna kindly ask you let Sony US officials know that they should work on firmware update to fix the Star eater issue and (re-!)enable possibility to install apps (play memories ,gps,Timelapse, Bracket Pro,Motion Shot,MultipleExposure,Sky HDR..) that were cut with release of A9/A7r3. Any astrophotographer would really appreciate that. Just killed it to prevent hacking the software?

ISO 64 is irrelevant for astrophotographers, as well as focus at -4ev (because you usually focus at infinity) and lenses (because all the F-mount lenses can be adapted).

illuminated buttons can be useful to some degree (but one usually wears a headlamp) and star eater is clearly an issue.

But the better high iso, the adaptability, and the manualfocus aids are welcomed additions for this use on the A7RIII as well as the adaptability on lenses. Also, the short flange distance allows for better WA designs (as seen with the 16-35 GM and 12-24G).

If sigma released an 14 1.8 for mirrorless it would be better and or smaller

And you don't even bother to address weather sealing? At least in a way to track it down without reading the whole thing. That is what's keeping me away from Sony. My Canon 1Dx and Olympus OMD E-M1 Mark II make Sony look like a toy because of this one issue.

You need it, I need it. But many, many other people do not. Absence of real weather sealing doesn't make this camera a toy.

Besides weather sealing was addressed in the review:<quote>Weather sealing is also an important consideration for those working in harsh environments and inclement weather. Sony claims that the camera is weather sealed, but obviously, is not water proof. While we do not subject our cameras to torture tests, anecdotally, the gaskets surrounding the battery, card and port doors are far less substantial than we've seen on competing high-end DSLRs and mirrorless options. Additionally, button travel and dial-feel may be problematic for those needing to wear gloves while shooting.</quote>

Sorry for being a pedant, but on Page 3: "Each of these three presets can be user defined, with a choice not only over the values of each setting but also over which camera functions are affects." Surely that is affected, not affects?

Also on Page 3: "that leaves your exposure settings along and jumps to Wide AF area mode and AF-C, so you can be prepared if something unexpected happens away from your chosen AF point." Think that is alone, not along.

Again on page 3: "These sets of parameters can then be assigned to any of three position on the mode dial." Positions not position.

While I am being useful, on Page 10, clicking on the openable link in this sentence "You need to push the camera's files pretty hard to get down to the level where electronic noise starts to visibly impact the images, putting the a7R III on a par with the Nikon D850" does not open up A7RIII as one of the cameras. It is not selectable either.

More about gear in this article

A couple months ago Sony released a major firmware update for its a7 III and a7R III cameras that includes significant new features and functionality. We've tested it, and here's why we think it's important.

Now that Nikon has entered the full-frame mirrorless camera market, the natural question that comes up is how its first model, the Z7, compares to Sony's high resolution king, the a7R III. We take a look at how these two cameras stack up against one another.

Tamron's 28-75mm F2.8 lens for E-mount is sharp, compact and is the first third-party standard zoom for the system. While we work through our full review, check out our preliminary sample gallery to get a feel for how it performs.

Sony has released new firmware for its a7R lll to insert a new option for Pixel Shift Multi Shooting that reduces the delay between frames to 0.5 sec. Firmware v1.10 adds the 0.5 sec delay setting to the menu so users can halve the current shortest time between frames taken with the camera in Pixel Shift Shooting mode.

Latest in-depth reviews

360 photos and video can be very useful for certain applications (as well as having fun). The Vuze+ is an affordable 360 camera that supports both 2D and 3D (stereo vision) capture, and might be the best option for someone wanting to experiment with the 360 format.

The Mikme Pocket is a portable wireless mic with particular appeal to smartphone users looking to up their game and improve the quality of recorded audio without the cost or complexity or traditional equipment.

The 90D is essentially the DSLR version of the EOS M6 Mark II mirrorless camera that was introduced alongside it. Like the M6 II, it features a 32MP sensor, Dual Pixel AF, fast burst shooting and 4K/30p video capture. It will be available mid-September.

The S1H is a full frame mirrorless camera designed with videographers in mind and includes advanced features like 6K video capture, 4:2:2 10-bit internal recording, improved video scopes, high frame rate recording, Panasonic Varicam color science and more.

Latest buying guides

If you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites.

Whether you're hitting the beach in the Northern Hemisphere or the ski slopes in the Southern, a rugged compact camera makes a great companion. In this buying guide we've taken a look at nine current models and chosen our favorites.

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

Whether you're new to the Micro Four Thirds system or a seasoned veteran, there are plenty of lenses available for you. We've used pretty much all of them, and in this guide we're giving your our recommendations for the best MFT lenses for various situations.

Blackmagic has announced an update to Blackmagic RAW that adds support, via plugins, to Adobe Premiere Pro and Avid Media Composer. Blackmagic also announced a pair of Video Assist 12G monitor-recorders with brighter HDR displays, USB-C recording and more.

Sony has announced the impending arrival of its next-generation video camera system, the FX9. The full-frame E-mount system is set to be released later this year with a 16-35mm E-mount lens to follow in spring 2020.

The Canon G5 X Mark II earns a Silver Award with its very good image quality, flexibility and the overall engaging experience of using the camera. However, if you need the very best in autofocus and video, other options may suit you better. Find out all the details in our full G5 X II review.

The Fujifilm X-A7 is the newest addition to the company's X-series lineup. Despite its relatively low price of $700 (with lens), Fujifilm didn't skimp on features. Click through to find out what you need to know about the X-A7.

The entry-level Fujifilm X-A7 improves upon many of its predecessor's weak points, including a zippier processor, an upgraded user experience and 4K/30p video capture. It goes on sale October 24th for $700 with a 15-45mm F3.5-5.6 kit lens.

Robert Frank's unconventional approach to photography and filmmaking defied generational constraints and inspired some of the most influential artists of the 20th century. He passed away today at age 94.

All three devices offer a standard 12MP camera plus, for the first time on an iPhone, an ultra-wide 13mm camera module. The 11 Pro and 11 Pro Max also retain the telephoto camera of previous generations.

Phase One's new XT camera system incorporates the company's IQ4 series of digital backs with up to 151MP of resolution and marries them to a line of Rodenstock lenses using the new XT camera body. The result is an impressively small package for one of the largest image sensors currently on the market - take a closer look here.

Phase One has announced its new XT camera system, which includes an IQ4 digital back, body (made up of a shutter release button and two dials) and a trio of Rodenstock lenses. The company is marketing the XT as a 'travel-friendly' product for landscape photographers.